Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Microsoft Patents Social Networks Idle

Microsoft Patents Looks-Are-Everything Dating 192

theodp writes "Screw that eHarmony Compatibility Matching System nonsense. 'Physical appearance is generally considered one of the most important search criteria among users of online dating services,' according to a patent granted Tuesday to five Microsoft Research Asia inventors. Its Image-Based Face Search technology not only allows people to specify the 'gender, age, ethnicity, location, height, weight, and the like' of their prey, explains Microsoft, it also allows them to 'provide a query image of a face for which they would like to search for similar faces.' So, even though you can't have the real Angelina Jolie or Natalie Portman, Microsoft will fix you up with a look-alike."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Microsoft Patents Looks-Are-Everything Dating

Comments Filter:
  • Good grief. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Frosty Piss ( 770223 ) * on Sunday January 02, 2011 @04:11PM (#34739204)
    Come on! Patenting searching for someone who looks like someone else?

    What's gong on at the Patent Office? I'm starting to think they all need to be drug tested.
  • Re:Website name (Score:5, Insightful)

    by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Sunday January 02, 2011 @04:23PM (#34739260) Journal
    Shallow, yes; but also refreshingly honest about it. Arguably giving such people an efficient clearinghouse in which to practice their assortative mating is a net win for everybody: If they have a clearly superior option, they will flock to it, and the people who aren't don't have to worry about the possibility of dealing with one of them who is emulating an interest in nonvisual qualities. Everybody wins.
  • Re:Website name (Score:5, Insightful)

    by erroneus ( 253617 ) on Sunday January 02, 2011 @04:27PM (#34739288) Homepage

    Truth is often the most ugly thing about life. We spend our daily lives dressing up and hiding the truth at every turn. When someone dies, we say "pass away." And when someone is defrauded or tricked in some way, we say "fucked." And no one goes out looking for someone with deformities or obesity and VERY few people can seriously "look past" them.

    I have been with great-looking women and many not-so-great-looking women. Great-looking women are rarely great people on the inside though and the only teacher of that is experience unfortunately and I had to become "over 35" to learn that lesson and accept the truth of it. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NF5XU-k2Vk -- there is a lot of truth in this song but I can't easily tell my wife that... it hurts her feelings. So instead I tell her another truth -- I am with her because she treats me very well and I appreciate it deeply) So yeah, there is something to be said about how "shallow" it all is, but the fact is, most people are shallow even when they think they are not. I know I am shallow in many ways and I accept it, because this shallowness is a part of human nature.

  • Re:Good grief. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by jonbryce ( 703250 ) on Sunday January 02, 2011 @04:56PM (#34739454) Homepage

    If the computer can do it for you by recognising features on the uploaded photo, then maybe it is patentable. However, the patent shouldn't be granted on the general idea, but on the specific technology that makes it possible.

  • Re:Good grief. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by causality ( 777677 ) on Sunday January 02, 2011 @05:40PM (#34739654)

    What's gong on at the Patent Office? I'm starting to think they all need to be drug tested.

    They can't do it because a method for selecting patent office workers based on analysis of drug use has already been patented.

    That reminds me of a really good quote:

    No drug, not even alcohol, causes the fundamental ills of society. If we're looking for the sources of our troubles, we shouldn't test people for drugs, we should test them for stupidity, ignorance, greed and love of power.
    -- P. J. O'Rourke

    I'd say those four things provide a coherent explanation of the current patent system.

  • Re:Good grief. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by aaaaaaargh! ( 1150173 ) on Sunday January 02, 2011 @05:54PM (#34739718)

    Part of the reason the patent system is broken is there is a huge misconception among people about what a patent is and isn't.

    I disagree, the patent system is broken because the patent evaluators have no clue about prior art and far too lax criteria for what counts as a specific implementation. That's why there are ridiculous yet valid patents for things like using windows as GUI elements or electronically serving structured documents from a remote server.

  • Re:Website name (Score:5, Insightful)

    by causality ( 777677 ) on Sunday January 02, 2011 @05:57PM (#34739728)

    Not at all. Let's face it, looks might not be everything, but they are important. It's only shallow if that's your only criterion.

    What looks mean to you can also be non-shallow. I'm likely to catch some flak for this but I'll give an example: obesity. That's a matter of looks, but it's also a matter of how the person got to be that way. It says something about their ability or willingness to take good care of themselves. If they do not wish to be obese but have failed to effectively do something about it, it says something about their level of discipline and commitment to goals that are important to them. If they do not accept personal responsibility for their own health, and instead have a million excuses for why their obesity is somehow not their fault, it tells you that they have a victim mentality and are unlikely to be honest about their own shortcomings within the framework of a relationship. That honesty about each other's shortcomings is the first necessary step towards accepting them and growing past them.

    Anyone angry or upset by the above paragraph is failing to understand one thing: you can be objectively honest about such matters, ugly though they may be, while also having compassion for the person who struggles with them. Just because someone doesn't meet your criteria for what you want in a mate, just because there are good reasons for that, doesn't make them any less human or any less worthy of kindness and respect. The level of childishness that has infiltrated this site is the only reason I feel a need to explain that, as many of you are trigger-happy when it comes to "ZOMG, he said something that might be negative, hurry, demonize him and deny any point he made!" It's the very opposite of benevolent benefit of doubt when multiple interpretations are possible, in other words.

    If a dating site has a prefilter that somehow magically figures out what you find physically attractive and only shows you those matches, that's tens of thousands of profiles you wouldn't have considered anyway that you no longer have to look through.

    That's true for someone who wants a serious relationship or a sexual relationship and will accept nothing else. It leaves little or no room though for deep, satisfying, rewarding friendships that you might have with someone who isn't attractive to you but has a big heart, a strong spirit, or a perspective on life that you truly appreciate.

    Also, it could be set up in such a way that you only see each other if you both are likely to find the other attractive. That would be a huge win because it would save an awful lot of awkwardness when one person likes the other but not vice-versa. For people who are intimidated by such social interaction, that would be a godsend.

    I admit that this is true, but is it ultimately a good thing? It would be "a godsend" in the short term. In the long term, wouldn't it also provide a means to run away from confronting one's own fears, overcoming them through persistent effort, and becoming a stronger person? Don't we do enough of that already?

    Combine that with something like eHarmony's matching scheme, and you could rapidly narrow down the choices to the dozen or so people that might actually work out, instead of having to manually weed out the million that wouldn't.

    The problem is that the patents on these systems make it less likely and more expensive for a single comprehensive service to offer both. It is one potential example of how the patent system actually retards progress.

  • Well (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ShooterNeo ( 555040 ) on Sunday January 02, 2011 @06:56PM (#34739996)

    From the perspective of an average man in the United States : there are a number of factors working against the average man in the U.S. today in terms of dating.

    1. The obesity epidemic. This removes millions of women who have the genetics to be desirable, but are instead obese.

    2. High incomes of most American workers, and relative egalitarianism. Unlike say, 1950, many women don't need men for money. They are no longer remotely impressed by men making incomes in the bottom 99%.

    3. Aging of the populance. All men, from age 13 to age 90, want women in the same age range. Women are fertile and make good mothers between ages 15 and 35. That's 17 years of (legal) breeding ability. Yet, out of the millions of men in the United States, every last one of them prefers women in this age range.

    And other factors. Sexual harassment laws mean that men who ask anyone at work for a date risk their careers. The laws in general have gone from being biased towards men (prehistory-1980) towards heavily biased in favor of women.

    This is why a lot of men in the U.S. would be best served dating oversees. If you're in the top 10-20% of income in the U.S., but not the top 1%, and you have average looks...you're a dud by the standards of the handful of attractive available non-obese women in the United States. You're royalty with that kind of money and prospects by equally attractive women in say, Ukraine.

  • Re:Good grief. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by andydread ( 758754 ) on Sunday January 02, 2011 @08:01PM (#34740238)
    Right and as patents are for the betterment of the arts and were created to encourage inventors to show how their invention works for the betterment of the arts, the patent filing should include the source code.

For God's sake, stop researching for a while and begin to think!

Working...